header-logo header-logo

Negligence fee victory for Mesothelioma sufferers

09 July 2015
Issue: 7660 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Fees , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Welcome court fee U-turn for mesothelioma cases

Mesothelioma sufferers will not be asked to spend their government pay-out on court fees if they bring a negligence claim, after Justice Secretary Michael Gove conceded defeat ahead of a judicial review.

Mesothelioma sufferers faced the prospect of paying up to £10,000 in court fees to bring a claim, after the government controversially hiked court fees for civil proceedings in March 2015. However, they can now apply for a fee remission without a statutory pay-out counting towards the “disposable capital” threshold.

Lawyers for the Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK and mesothelioma sufferers Ian Doughty and Carole Sloper brought a legal challenge, arguing that mesothelioma sufferers, whose terminal lung condition is caused by exposure to asbestos, are typically of modest means—their illness makes them disabled within the terms of the Equality Act 2010.

As they will have received a lump sum award of about £15,000 under the Pneumoconiosis Etc Workers’ Compensation) Act, they will usually not qualify for the fee remissions scheme, which has a threshold of £16,000 in “disposable capital”. Their claim will be worth £150,000 to £300,000 so they would therefore need to pay up to £10,000 up front in order to bring a negligence claim.

Their lawyers argued that mesothelioma sufferers would be prevented from bringing a claim because they could not be expected to give up a large part of their disposable capital in the last months of their lives.

A judicial review hearing was scheduled for later this month. However, Gove agreed last week to exclude mesothelioma compensation awards from the definition of “disposable capital” and will now place an amending statutory instrument to that effect before Parliament.

Issue: 7660 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Fees , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll